I would for sure second that. I am using COM for dealing with this thing: http://www.sparxsystems.com/ about all day long a couple days a week.
Bridging this with Roassal/Moose for additional visualisations would be super (I am going to look at that one in the coming weeks to help with the overall quality assessment of a quite large model). Phil On Sun, Oct 2, 2016 at 5:44 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaring...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2016-10-02 10:57 GMT-03:00 Dimitris Chloupis <kilon.al...@gmail.com>: > > By the way I am all for COM for Pharo, the issue is that 2/3 of our > > community are MacOS and Linux users , I dont even remember the last time > we > > had a Windows only topic in the mailing list. Modern languages generally > > avoid using OS specific libraries, the last exceptions be C# and Swift > and > > C# definetly looks like it will be fully cross platform soon enough (it > > already is because of Mono). > > I wouldn't state such affirmations without a proper surveying. > > My latest survey related with RDBMS support [1] showed that the users > of Windows are on par with the users of MacOS. > > I am a Windows user, who runs most of the Pharo images inside Linux > VMs not because I don't want to run them in Windows, but because the > current support of Windows is somewhat limited. > > Having COM support for Pharo in a Windows environment would be a big > enabler to a lot of current users of Smalltalk that don't use Pharo. > > Esteban A. Maringolo > > [1] https://medium.com/@emaringolo/pharo-rdbms-support-survey-results- > 9c8f640878db#.ym049enul > > >
